Dear Pedro, Thanks for the copy of your ICIS 2016 presentation which covers a lot of evolutionary aspects regarding intelligence and the information flow. Perhaps one aspect of that subject may deserve a bit more. It is “human mind”. For instance, your chart (N°39) on the four domains of science (physical, biological, social, informational) could contain a 5th component: “humanities” in order to explicitly take into account human mind. This because it is a key step in the evolution of our universe (energy, matter, life, human mind) that cannot be today deduced from the other domains. And also because an understanding of human mind could introduce possible evolutions of human motivations for the better of mindkind (you remember the evolutionary scenario where the proposed interactions of anxiety management with self-consciousness introduce possibilities for new understandings on human nature in terms of motivations and actions. I think (and hope) that human evolution is not over and this is in the direction of sheding some light on a possible maturing of human self-consciousness for the better of mankind). (http://philpapers.org/rec/MENPFA-3).
[http://philpapers.org/assets/raw/philpapers-plus250.jpg]<http://philpapers.org/rec/MENPFA-3> Christophe Menant, Proposal for an evolutionary approach ...<http://philpapers.org/rec/MENPFA-3> philpapers.org Christophe Menant (2010). Evolutionary Advantages of Inter-Subjectivity and Self-Consciousness Through Improvements of Action Programs (2010). Dissertation, Tucson ... Best Christophe ________________________________ De : Fis <fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es> de la part de Pedro C. Marijuan <pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es> Envoyé : jeudi 17 novembre 2016 14:09 À : 'fis' Objet : [Fis] Intelligence & Meaning & The Brain Dear FIS Colleagues, Herewith the dropbox link to the Chengdu's presentation on Intelligence and the Information Flow (as kindly requested by Christophe and Gordana). https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wslnk41c3lquc55/AADpm_U6xuhm6jHK0esyN-29a?dl=0 About the ongoing exchanges on language and meaning, there could be some additional arguments to consider: 1. Evolutionary origins of language (Terry can say quite a bit about that). It is difficult to establish a clear stage into which well formed oral language would have emerged. That the basis was both gestural (Susan Goldin Meadow) and emotional utterances seems to be more and more accepted. Alarm calls for instance in some monkeys contain distinct sound codes that clearly imply an associated meaning on what is the specific predator to take care of (aerial, felines, snakes) with differentiated behavioral escape responses in each case. Pretty more complex in human protolanguages. 2. Nervous Systems functioning. The action-perception cycle in advanced mammals would be the engine of information processing and meaning generation. The advancement of the life cycle would be the source and sink of the communicative exchanges and the ultimate reference for meaning. (This connects with the info flows and intelligence of my presentation). 3. Human "sociotype" maintenance. As the natural social groups of humans grew out of proportion regarding other Anthropoidea (see Dunbar's number), a new form of "grooming" and group consensus was established around language and other emotional utterances (importance of laughter). Paradoxically, language's meaning becomes downsized to the level of small talk, just chattering to keep social bonds afloat. The "social brain hypothesis" on the origins of language developed by Robin Dunbar and other scholars points in this direction. In my opinion, points 1 and 3 have already appeared in this list. But point 2 has been very rarely discussed among us (how the brain fabricates meaning). So, tentatively, the next discussion session will deal with some of this neurodynamic stuff (in preparation yet: "The Topological Brain"). In the meantime, Maybe Mark would like to make some concluding comments in order to close the present session... Thanks are due to him both for his preparation-work and for his patience regarding all the tangents in this session! Best wishes --Pedro El 16/11/2016 a las 15:51, Dai Griffiths escribió: > Many (most?) linguistic interactions are not propositional in the > sense that you imply. > > There is no verifiable equivalent to opening the fridge door for > utterances like "Cool", "Give us a hand won't you", "You're welcome", > "Justin Bieber is wonderful", "You go and sneak in round the back > while I distract them at the front door", and so on. > > So I doubt your 'usually', and the application to natural language. > > Dai > > > On 15/11/16 15:05, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> A model is a mathematical structure making a sentence (proposition) >> true or false, and this, in my opinion applies to meaning in the >> natural language, where usually some notion of reality is involved: >> the proposition "there is two beers in the fridge" is judged >> meaningful because we believe in a reality with fridge containing, or >> not, beers. > _______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis Fis Info Page - unizar.es<http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis> listas.unizar.es The FIS initiative (Foundations of Information Science) started in 1994 with a first meeting in Madrid (organized by Michael Conrad and Pedro Marijuan), and was ...
_______________________________________________ Fis mailing list Fis@listas.unizar.es http://listas.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis
